Dismantling starts in 2 years and will (expectedly) take 8 years.
To me this is a reminder that nuclear power stations have been poorly planned and constructed. If fission power is to have a future, the constructions will need to be much more modular, and the dismantling process planning must be part of the construction planning. The formula: "Build a nuclear power station, then close your eyes and hope it will run for ever and dismantle itself safely and cheaply afterwards" isn't acceptable any more.

According to wikipedia currently the annual net output is 23 TWh (average 2012-2016). What's that? The energy Stockholm uses? It should pay for dismantling and disposal. Probably nothing to do with nuclear. Battersea from the Pink Floyd-Animals cover was opened in 55, closed at 75 ( the year the album came out ), and they still barely figured out what they gonna do with it. For hmmm - 45 years in the middle of f*cking London, where any tiny area of land cost as much as a ... a lot. ( Like a few years back some developer needed to pay out a homeless man who set up his cardboard box on the same unused spot for more than x years. Like half a million pounds for 2sqm? )( You need to notice that everything white people do grown overly bureaucratized. If we don't sort our shit out we will be screwed, by the more industrious. )

Transport 2.9Twh? So a midsize nuclear power plant could cover the electric car needs of the country?
Worth to look into the relevant wiki pages. ( Ringhals, Battersea, Bureaucracy, Electricity sector in Sweden )

have

come again

mbs.php3[?TPP=00] : Show first main page with up to TPP threads

mbs.php3?thread=xx[&TPP=00] : Show the main page which include thread XX with up to TPP threads

mbs.php3?thread=xx&num=yy : Show post xx and its corresponding thread

mbs.php3?thread=xx&expand=on : Show all post in Thread on a single html page (usefull to keep a local copy)